Europe's Renewable Energy Push Has Completely Backfired, And Electricity Bills Are Skyrocketinghttp://www.businessinsider.com/europes-soaring-energy-prices-2013-11/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Fri, 09 Dec 2016 23:38:27 -0500Rob Wilehttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ca0066bb3f7ff67df1733Mike WiseFri, 08 Nov 2013 03:25:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ca0066bb3f7ff67df1733
A rather breathless and panicy article. Gas is at an unsustainable low price at the moment in the USA, for the industry to make a profit the price of natural gas in the US might have to double. The price of solar is on a steady inexorable decline as we get better and better at producing silicon, there is really not stopping it. And does anyone seriously doubt that we will have awesome and far cheaper batteries available in 20 years given our insatiable demand for all things electric and mobility?
Yes, Europe surely made some stupid moves, like closing down the well-run and maintained (and paid for) German nukes early, but these are little things in the big picture.
Anyone who is making a big bet that the future of energy lies in fossil fuels is in for some serious pain not too far down the road.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527be430eab8ea1876df1737alpha2actualThu, 07 Nov 2013 14:04:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527be430eab8ea1876df1737
Following is a quote from 7/20 Economist article on Spain’s solar policies.
The government failed to cut subsidies when renewables were booming, so the cuts have had to be draconian. It imposed no cap on new capacity and stood by while that grew uncontrollably (this also happened in Germany). The promised jobs have vanished. The solar-energy business has lost tens of thousands of jobs from its peak. And after repeated retroactive cuts no one is willing to invest in renewable energy any more. Yet because projects often receive subsidies for 20 years, the costs remain. Even after the cuts, renewables subsidies are running at €7 billion-8 billion a year. It is not hard to think of better ways of spending such large sums of taxpayers’ moneyhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/527bd36069bedd0747df1733alpha2actualThu, 07 Nov 2013 12:52:32 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527bd36069bedd0747df1733
Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound has been approved. The project will cost $2.6 BILLON, and it has secured funding for $2 BILLON of that from a Japanese bank. But this is believed to be subject to the project gaining a loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy. The contracted cost of the wind farm's energy will be 23 cents a kilowatt hour (excluding tax credits, which are unlikely to last the length of the project), which is more than 50% higher than current average electricity prices in Massachusetts. The Bay State is already the 4th most expensive state for electricity in the nation. Even if the tax credits are preserved, $940 million of the $1.6 billion contract represents costs above projections for the likely market price of conventional power. Moreover, these costs are just the initial costs they are scheduled to rise by 3.5 percent annually for 15 years.
This project is rated at 468 MW and will produce 143 MW after applying a Capacity Factor of 30.4 % the time the wind actually blows. Life cycle is 20 years therefore this project will produce 24.6 Terawatts life cycle.
A Combined Cycle Natural Gas Turbine plant studied by the DOE completed in 2010 is rated at 570 MW and produces 470 MW, capacity factor 85%. Cost $311 MILLION. Life cycle 35 years therefore this plant will produce 133 Terawatts life cycle.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527bbdc0eab8ea5124df1734golfcrackerjackThu, 07 Nov 2013 11:20:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527bbdc0eab8ea5124df1734
Completely predictable and totally unnecessary as the foolish West kowtows to the global warming narrative -- a narrative fed by problematical science, publication bias, grant bias and fanned lots of "gas" aimed at making money and fame for a few hundred true-believer "scientists" (who can no longer shout-down naysayers) and the politicians who see them as a means to ever more control by government..http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b37dc69bedd44639dd05dmichael kanellosThu, 07 Nov 2013 01:49:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b37dc69bedd44639dd05d
Your lead contains a pretty large mistake. The Shale Boom has not allowed homeowners to lower their electricity bills. Power bills have continued to rise about 6% a year.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b1605eab8eafc445cceb1nouseWed, 06 Nov 2013 23:24:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b1605eab8eafc445cceb1
Even when solar panels are powered by nanotechnology? Whoever masters solar first wins aka Germany. What about Thorium power plants? Global Warming is really happening and the actions of man are speeding up the process. Whoever has owns the technology to reverse or slow it sooner...will have the most power win shit hits the fan in the coming century.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b14ffecad04da6f5cceb1nouseWed, 06 Nov 2013 23:20:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527b14ffecad04da6f5cceb1
Well you do need a planet in order to do business. The Europeans admit this fact. The Americans do not.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ace2e69beddcc719dd059Melro52Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:18:06 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ace2e69beddcc719dd059
It's always been the case when new industry emerges that costs go up at first and that's passed along to customers. But as new industry continues to grow it spurs innovation and slowly prices come down drastically. There is no other choice. Pay the price now or pay the price with life later on.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ac55b69bedd405c9dd06cJohannesWed, 06 Nov 2013 17:40:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527ac55b69bedd405c9dd06c
Well Rob, I'm living in Belgium, and installed solar panels on the roof of our house. As things are going now, I expect them to be paid back in full in 12 years. After then it's money in the pocket for me. The fun part being that the more electricity prices go up, the shorter my payback period becomes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527abd2fecad0454425cceb6Guest500Wed, 06 Nov 2013 17:05:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527abd2fecad0454425cceb6
Add a comment...No one is paying me. What I have done is the mathematical research so I can understand the difference in the energy density and output to make a qualified statement. I strongly suggest you do the same, you'll be shocked and perhaps dismayed when you learn the difference.
The bottom line is that wind and solar will never be able to provide even 20% of our needs. That's not a political position, it is a scientific fact.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527aa4fdeab8ea5a535cceb1CorneliuWed, 06 Nov 2013 15:22:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527aa4fdeab8ea5a535cceb1
Who's paying you Rob to write this? The Oil and Coal association? Yes, prices are going up but emissions are going down fast and staying down. Moving back to "cheap" is not the option, moving faster to green is the option.
Renewables have also side advantages: less destroying of our mountains through mining or oil extraction, less transport and processing of coal and petrol, less profit going to OPEC and 2-3 other companies that control 90% of the world's coal and oil.
Plus lower long term maintenance costs.
Yes, it's a price we pay to get out of the hook of the oil and coal monopoly.
Have you seen the destruction and pollution in China due to Coal and Oil? Their cities are a cancer trap, haze everywhere and polluted that you can't breathe. Let's bash Europe because they try to be clean and tell them to go back to Coal. Well done.
It's a pity you write such articles to try to convince people that coal or oil or gas is an alternative.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7f81ecad04ca459ab767Guest500Wed, 06 Nov 2013 12:42:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7f81ecad04ca459ab767
We don't have a "fossil fuel" dependence. We have an energy dependence and in fact EVERY country does. It only happens to be fossil fuels because they have incredible energy output per unit, unlimited storage potential (with no loss in energy), and they are easily transported, hence the "addiction."
There is simply no alternative that's remotely close to fossil fuels which is why they became the standard that's in use today.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7ecdecad04da459ab767Guest500Wed, 06 Nov 2013 12:39:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7ecdecad04da459ab767
Add a comment...You don't understand energy production and I'm guessing have spent very little time in math class. A, there is no such thing as "free" energy. By its very nature energy is generated at a cost- all energy. B, the pollution generated by the so called "green" solutions is significant and C, dismantling nuclear energy, the single least polluting and efficient form of power generation we have, is simply stupid and will cause not only rates to rise and rising rates means lower production for the economy and a loss of jobs, declining business environment, etc.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7d196bb3f7163d9ab768Guest500Wed, 06 Nov 2013 12:32:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7d196bb3f7163d9ab768
What went wrong? It is very simple. Morons from the Green Party in Germany dismantled the nuclear facilities under the absurd promise that "renewables" could substitute. Energy production is a quantitative exercise i.e. the number of BTUs that can be generated per unit and the cost of the generation are very quantifiable but obviously the Green Party was either to stupid or just plain lied to the public and convinced them that windmills could somehow substitute for nuclear. Now they are paying for this.
I highly recommend the book Gusher of Lies. It gives a detailed analysis of energy outputs and clearly shows that nuclear is really the only viable option for us right now. Everything else either pollutes too much or has miniscule energy output AND storage problems.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a793269bedd0d269ab76dhammermanWed, 06 Nov 2013 12:15:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a793269bedd0d269ab76d
Mehh spend $1000 on a mini wind turbine and $300 on 24 volt cells and tie into your breaker...
Gov gives a 30% green credit for buying it
It will produce up 600 kwh a month; more around 250-400....some states are even required to buy up additional energy produced. SO some months you can receive a check..http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a78946bb3f7ec319ab767troobleWed, 06 Nov 2013 12:12:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a78946bb3f7ec319ab767
Pellets and secondary combustion chambers. Awesome.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a76f1ecad0402369ab767xvWed, 06 Nov 2013 12:05:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a76f1ecad0402369ab767
I cant speak for the rest of europe but one reason the bills are so high here is that Thatcher sold off the utilities. Now decades later, they are making record profits by ripping everyone off.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7504eab8ea46669ab76aDoug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:57:40 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7504eab8ea46669ab76a
Indeed.
And then they high-five and congratulate themselves on how smart they are.
These are the people who brought us Obamacare, and want to do for energy what they did for health insurance.
I hear Costa Rica is lovely this time of year.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7291ecad04bf2e9ab765dknolaWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:47:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7291ecad04bf2e9ab765
With all those panels on everyones roofs they should disconnect from the grid and give themselves free energy. Screw the power companies, if they can’t figure it out after so long, then the people need to take it over and give themselves energy.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7040eab8eae95c9ab767JWRWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:37:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a7040eab8eae95c9ab767
2008 = market crash. 2006 = middle of a housing induced economic boom. Check yourself before you wreck yourself.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6d6fecad0443219ab76aDoug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:25:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6d6fecad0443219ab76a
Don't look now, but your employer wants to make a profit, too.
They just are so far unable to do so.
How's that gawker thing working out for you?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6bdeeab8eae6549ab765stWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:18:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6bdeeab8eae6549ab765
It is called investment in a better future. Take away the corporate welfare in US model and the Euro model is cheap. US energy cost have no reserve build in for cleaning run away nuclear plants,no offsets for carcinogens, no cost allotted for destruction of roads and water by fracking, 1/3 of military budget to secure oil not included in energy price, Oil companies get largest tax break of all industries etc.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a68aaecad0421189ab766Duh2Wed, 06 Nov 2013 11:04:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a68aaecad0421189ab766
At least Obama did not lie about the impact of his energy policies, like he did about Obamacare: “Under my cap and trade plan,” Obama said, “electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket.” He even threatened to bankrupt anyone stupid enough to build a coal plant, saying that “if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6874eab8ead74d9ab765Doug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 11:04:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a6874eab8ead74d9ab765
The middle east supplies only about 12% of US oil needs.
<a href="http://www.npr.org/2012/04/11/150444802/where-does-america-get-oil-you-may-be-surprised" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://www.npr.org/2012/04/11/150444802/where-does-america-get-oil-you-may-be-surprised</a>
I don't think the "billions" we "throw" to big oil companies affects their behavior very much in their trillion-dollar world business.
Each "billion" is about three dollars per US person.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a67486bb3f792119ab765Doug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:59:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a67486bb3f792119ab765
The GDP is at an all-time high, and has been growing for the last three years.
So you need a new excuse. Let me know when it's ready.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a65d9eab8eab2489ab768bucketheadWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:52:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a65d9eab8eab2489ab768
The crux of the matter.
If I can have solar power for twenty years by spending $XXXX now, it is a no brainer. Will that solar power fulfill all my needs? Maybe, maybe not. It can still be supplemented if necessary.
In the above article/post I don't see references to price per KWhrs Solar/vs fossil. I see talk of subsidies and taxation mixed in with different power source usage trends.
The money already spent on 'renewable' power generation is already spent. (Maintenance still to be factored) so with that in mind, energy from those sources would now be less expensive that purchasing fossil fuels.
Is this discussion really about paying for bonds, which were purchased against these renewable energy assets?
Renewables are coming. Lead, react, get out of the way.... I'm guessing well connected moneyed interests will attempt to put renewables out of the reach of individuals.
Solar up now. (Or whatever renewable type is more suited to your location)
Fun fact: Did you know that wood is a renewable resource and newer technologies have made it a very efficient and clean as a heating source?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a64c9ecad0434119ab770vathomasjr1Wed, 06 Nov 2013 10:48:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a64c9ecad0434119ab770
Using a transnational strategy would “simultaneously achieve low costs through location economies, economies of scale, and learning effect while differentiating their product offering across geographical borders to account for the local differencesTransnational strategy would seem to fit because it includes the strategies of localization that deals with the high demands for local responsiveness in product usage. I understand that many would believe that a transnational strategy would be known as an uneasy theory to pursue because it places conflicting demands on the multinational company, But I believe it would be the optimal strategy to use in this case.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a635beab8ead5409ab767SchmidtWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:42:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a635beab8ead5409ab767
Good point, Rob. However, here in Germany no one ever say anything about it. People over here are total sheep and do whatever they are told to. My electricity bill is indeed skyrocketing and my natural gas bill (heating) has become a horror story. It really hurts.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a62eeecad04730c9ab770docwhoWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:40:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a62eeecad04730c9ab770
Don't panic, Rob.
Take another look at the data, then re-write your headline.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5f8569bedd53679ab771baustinfWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:25:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5f8569bedd53679ab771
I second that—the United States of Hypocrites. Only in America do some individuals put profit and money over other people and forget that the religion 90% of them adhere to is supposed to help take care of others.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5eedeab8eaf2369ab779Jill KlausenWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:23:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5eedeab8eaf2369ab779
"As a result, there's talk of putting climate goals on hold to help bring costs down."
Sure, utterly destroy the entire planet for all future generations for the unholy love of money in your greedy pockets today. WTG corporate governments!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5eb7ecad041f059ab765skepticusmaximusWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:22:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5eb7ecad041f059ab765
Funny, but 2006 was the time when our economy was stalling and people were cutting back on energy use and driving due to declining paychecks. Could the Economic Depression..I'm sorry, Recession be a major cause of the decline in emissions?
I know you won't buy that argument, as it doesn't fit your extreme Right Wing politics.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5da8ecad0424039ab769ClownFartWed, 06 Nov 2013 10:18:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5da8ecad0424039ab769
America. The land where 1/2 it's citizens would rather destroy the enviroment and destroy the health of their neighbor in order to save a few bucks. Jesus would be proud!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a592d69beddfe599ab773Doug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:58:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a592d69beddfe599ab773
Korea and Afghanistan are hardly major sources of petroleum.
You're citing yet another liberal cliche that is not supported by facts.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a58eceab8eabb2a9ab771march21Wed, 06 Nov 2013 09:57:48 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a58eceab8eabb2a9ab771
Europe is more densely populated than the US. Unlimited carbon emission will make Europe look like Asia---permanent brown out. Natural gas may burn clean but drilling for it pollutes water supply. US has more air and water than Eurasia and therefore can afford to be derisive of Europe's pursuit of clean energy. But please remember, pollution cannot be contained. What happens in Europe does not stay in Europe. So they are doing the world a service by eschewing coal/petroleum based energy and investing in clean energy. Also Europe's pursuit of clean energy may give rise to new technology and maybe good for business. No matter what any expert say, only solar energy is unlimited and every effort should be done to harness it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5424ecad04666f9ab76bRedneck2Wed, 06 Nov 2013 09:37:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5424ecad04666f9ab76b
The really sad thing is that a narrow mind imposes "renewable" fuel and now we are destroying the agricultural soil and we burn our food in our cars.
The midwest is turning into a desert, aquifer is depleting and soil lose it's nutrients and turns to dust.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a539d6bb3f7fb669ab76atoenailWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:35:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a539d6bb3f7fb669ab76a
I have never noticed the US military keeping open the supply lines from Central England and South Wales coal mines.... which could be generating low-cost affordable energy to Britain, if it weren't for the misguided greens and their guilt-laden fellow travellers in the British government and EU task-masters in Brussels
Perhaps you could show me where to look, trooble.
On the other hand it's nice to see Blodget finally focussing on real business and economics news rather than supporting/reporting on pinko business approaches that drive us into penury.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a508869beddbb449ab765faux outrageWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:22:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a508869beddbb449ab765
Yes, we must consume non-renewable resources as quickly as possible since they have no value to us once we are dead.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5016eab8ead8199ab765blackswan's smarter brotherWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:20:06 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a5016eab8ead8199ab765
It's easy to imagine the trillions of euros in government waste involved, as the crony contractors rake in the money. If a Government really wants people to use alternative energy, tax them less, rather than more. I'd put solar on my house tomorrow, if the government would give me a dollar for dollar matching tax credit. I could sell "smart" homes all day, if the government would give my buyers dollar for dollar matching tax credits. Unfortunately, the crony contractors, who finance political campaigns and offer our politicians triple figure retirement 'consulting' jobs, will never allow the citizens get the tax breaks. Governments don't care about energy efficiency or greenhouse gasses, they care about the trillions of dollars that will be made by the international banks through taxing the people with cap-n-trade, and through filling the pockets of government crony contractors.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4eedeab8ea6b149ab76dGregWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:15:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4eedeab8ea6b149ab76d
Nowhere, not even in my comment. I'd like to know what it would take. That's really what determines whether all this makes sense. I don't see you backing up your (actual) assertion of 20000% costs and economic devastation with any real data though.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4d3c6bb3f7a55b9ab76dMr. ConvenientWed, 06 Nov 2013 09:07:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4d3c6bb3f7a55b9ab76d
Anyone with an ounce of common sense knew this was coming... which is why our government will latch on with both hands. Wake up sheople.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4b33eab8ea740f9ab76cFatCatWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:59:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4b33eab8ea740f9ab76c
Another fine example of socialising the investments and privatising the profits. Europe is screwed because of their incompetent governments, EU and harsh, global warming-induced winters. Get out of there while you can!!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4b02ecad046c5d9ab76bVicWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:58:26 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4b02ecad046c5d9ab76b
Where does it say that 20% increase in price could meet all our needs. The price for renewable to replace all of fossil fuel energy is probably close to 20000% and comes with utter economic devastation.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4abf6bb3f7df549ab769troobleWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:57:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4abf6bb3f7df549ab769
Alternative Headline:
"The world's reliance on the US military to keep open the supply lines of expensive but replaceable petroleum has completely backfired, and prices are returning to their historical average."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4a666bb3f7ea549ab767PoohratWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:55:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4a666bb3f7ea549ab767
No shit? Really? Wow, never heard that the green energy scam aren't sustainable or even cost effective with our subsidies. Fucking unreal.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a49f869bedd75379ab767ObispitoWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:54:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a49f869bedd75379ab767
In some countries like Spain, the renewable energy bubble has been so dramatic that bills have more tan tripled in 4 years, investors in renewable have been cut off the subsidies and therefore long term investment is no longer profitable. On top of that, industries are internationally not competitive anymore due to the astronomic energy bill.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a498eecad04555d9ab765good thing Obama wanted to drill, drill, drillWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:52:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a498eecad04555d9ab765
Obama's brilliance shines through again.
Although a move to renewables should be more expensive, cost was not really the issue. It is the sustainability, but mix that with incompetence and the result can be brutal. Of course, Obama's healthcare rollout gives us a picture of what could have been in energy.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4902ecad04f45a9ab765Doug in VirginiaWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:49:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a4902ecad04f45a9ab765
Whereas US carbon emissions are down 15% since 2006 without any policy mandating same.
<a href="http://nation.time.com/2013/10/22/efficiency-natural-gas-keep-pushing-u-s-carbon-emissions-down/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" >http://nation.time.com/2013/10/22/efficiency-natural-gas-keep-pushing-u-s-carbon-emissions-down/</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a48fe69bedd4a379ab765GregWed, 06 Nov 2013 08:49:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/527a48fe69bedd4a379ab765
If for 20% higher costs starting now we could end up with a reliable solar/wind/geothermal/tidal/hydroelectric based power generation system that could meet all of our needs in 10 or 20 years that would be a pretty good deal in my mind if for no other reason than that we could start completely ignoring the middle east.